Jonas Blomberg Ghini

Great fun!

Revisado: 01-09-20

The style is noticeably different from The Colour of Magic; Guards! Guards! is a bit darker, and less in your face about subversion of tropes. It also has some decently dark commentary on humanity towards the end.

The story is thoroughly entertaining, and the narration is great. Note that there are a few spots where the audio does odd things, I think only three, maybe four places one word disappeared. No big issue.

Well worth the time and money, and I will certainly get the rest, to find out what happens to Carrot, Nobby, Vimes, Colon, and the orangutan librarian.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Fascinating, despite claims of errors

Revisado: 12-09-19

I've listened to this book twice, now (it being the first in my library to get a second complete re-listen), and the stars I gave it a year and a half ago still stand. My thoughts, though, have matured a little. Harari covers mostly social aspects of the human species all the way from our cradle in Africa 200 000 years ago, up till 2014.

I am not learned in the field, and cannot immediately say anything about the accuracy of what Harari writes, and I note several more or less expert reviewers giving Harari flack for sensationalism and errors. As such, perhaps it is good not to take Sapiens as gospel as far as details go.

In a course I followed as part of my PhD in physics, we touched upon how the need for accurate time keeping came about, where my professor suggested the need arose not too long after the black death when scarcity of labour made it more important for skilled craftsmen to keep tabs on how long they actually worked on a given project. Harari suggests accurate time keeping came about in the newly railroaded Great Britain, where accurate scheduling suddenly became important. To be fair, Harari really discusses synchronisation, not accuracy, but the gist of the argument makes it seem like the need for train time tables gave rise to the industry of accurate time pieces. Whether the black death or the trains were more critical, I can't say, but the Swiss began making their famous watches in the 15th century, which is a bit more in line with the black death than with the industrial revolution.

Be that as it may, a potential lack of exact facts seem to me not to detract from a slew of very interesting thoughts on the broader topic.

Three points stick with me;

1) The fraud of agriculture.
I feel Harari paints an unduly romantic picture of the life of a hunter gatherer, saying they had 40 hour work weeks and spent lots of time with their children and telling stories under the stars. It sounds a bit stylised. But, my gut tells me he is on the right track in his condemnation of the agricultural revolution. As humans, we have an incredible inability to look ahead, and Sapiens posits this inability trapped us in a dreadful spiral of growing population and diminishing freedom. At first, it seems like a good idea to spend an extra month in this here spot to tend to some plants that grew really well last year. Take a month and weed a bit, maybe chase off a herd of grazers or whatever, and then continue on the nomad trek. Next year, you will return to loads of tasty fruits/grains/some plant or other. Well, a month turns to two, then the band of foragers suddenly have a couple babies on their hands, and might not easily move for another few months. Now you need a hut, rather than just a lean-to. Before your grumpy grandfather knows it, you're established, and you're farming more than you forage and hunt. And your great grandchildren are two fields over clubbing another farmer to death to take his land. And women are suddenly just baby machines rather than root and berry pickers. And one third of your children die of starvation and diseases from close-quarters living. Oh, and you are about as likely to die of violence as of starvation. Great.

The story Harai weaves simply makes sense to me. We see it time and again; we start doing something that seems great in the moment, but three generations hence, we've no more oil, the atmosphere is turning toxic, and we're hopped up on a cocktail of hormone mimicking chemicals. And the goddam bees are dying. So, for all of Harari's romanticising of hunter gatherer societies, I think he's onto something about how we accidentally fell into becoming farmers, paving the way for slums, kings, and feudal hierarchy.

2) How come European culture became so dominant?
This is an interesting topic that can easily turn into a trashy cultural masturbation contest, but on the whole, I feel Harari navigates it well. Now, I am of both Southern and Northern European descent, so I may just not be sufficiently tuned to pick up on major issues with his arguments. That said, he makes the case that in the 15th century, there were no major technological differences between the largest powers in the world; Europeans, the Ottomans, the Chinese, they were all pretty evenly matched as far as technology went, and it might seem like a surprise that only 200/300 years later, Europe would have such a choke hold around the globe. Harari's suggestion for the key difference is social and philosophical: Europeans were unusually willing to accept ignorance, and unusually interested in filling these gaps in knowledge. European cultures were the first ones in which great swathes of individuals had personal interest in discovering stuff. Of course, in light of our global culture where these kinds of ideals are, well, ideals, this sounds uncomfortably like European cultures are "better". But that isn't what Harari drives at. It simply "is" like this. Meaning also that incredible damage and suffering, past and future, is at the hands of European cultures. Speaking of how things might have been better if some other culture had gained the upper hand the way Europe did is not part of Harari's discussion, but that's fine by me; he is describing history at this point, letting the listener draw any moral conclusions on their own.

3) Empire + Capitalism + Science
As a budding scientist with what I consider pure motivations, I'm no great fan of how science and imperialism has gone hand in hand since the scientific revolution. Yet, here we are. Harari draws a parallel between science and empire building in which he posits a philosophical equivalence; science is about dominion over nature, insofar as large amounts of science is done to bolster our ability to make use of nature for our purposes. And the parts of science not about conquest as such, are still all about us, and our desire to pad the list of things we understand. Perhaps it could not really be otherwise, or, perhaps, it is a consequence of European hegemony, and another culture's approach might have led to science unmarred by ties to economic gains and imperial ambitions.

Some critics from the fields of anthropology and history say Harari lacks originality here, and says he goes a bit rogue in the parts where he provides his own thoughts. This is pretty scathing critique, but also a bit beside the point. I don't think Sapiens is entirely accurate, and I don't think it was meant to be used as the curriculum for a human history course. I think it lays out some sensible arguments about human history that I would not have seen were it not for Harari writing this book, and that is what I expect from a popular science work. I now have a little insight into a field that interests me, and have things to think about.

Well worth a listen!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 386 personas

Wonderful

Revisado: 12-01-19

The Dispossessed shows, brilliantly, why science fiction deserves more praise than it gets. Science fiction lets an author explore "what if"s. And Le Guin dives deep into the implications of a society that has diverged, several generations ago, into a branch similar to our modern Western world, and a branch clearly presented as a utopia.

Le Guin shines a critical light on capitalism, revolution, human proclivity to compare success between individuals, the majority rule of social decorum, environmental damage and strife, equality, anarchism, desire for recognition weighed against the need for truth. She covers a lot of topics, and most of them are investigated from several angles.

The way she paints the capitalist society shows its many faults. The way she paints the anarchist society shows its many faults. We're left wiser about challenges we, in our modern day, need to grapple with, or challenges yet to come, or challenges we think we have surmounted. There is no perfect system. There is no perfect world.

If there is any conclusion to be drawn, it must be that evolution need be guided by solidarity if we are to make it. Any system that loses sight of solidarity will falter. Humanity comes first; humane acts are the only ones that can foster socially and ecologically sustainable paths.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

It's OK

Revisado: 11-19-19

Some spoilers ahead, I'm afraid.

The start is quite a slog. I understand the literary tool of setting a mood by drawing the minutia and monotony in excruciating detail, and I cannot deny it works. I just don't like it as a tool. Perhaps it is used here to contrast life's three regions: within, on, and outside the wall. As I can identify that as a possibility, the tool must work, a bit, at least, but the tone never changes. The story is only ever related in the same flat and pointless manner. Our protagonist only cares about getting off the Wall, but the thought of it seems not to give him any actual hope. So everything is grey, everything is a waste of time and effort.

I feel Lanchester misses a great opportunity to investigate society and human nature when he simply skips what could have been an incredibly interesting tension between those who choose to have and those who choose not to have children. In the story, the ones who have no children just find those who do a bit odd, and nothing more is said on the matter. I simply don't buy it. A Great Britain surrounded by a large wall would run into population trouble fast, as is hinted at in the story. And under pressure, humanity tends not to work all that well. There is no way society would not become this awkward, potentially violent mess where childless people consider themselves morally superior to those who make babies, while the "breeders" think they are the more responsible for the future. By and large, we love to hate what we love, and the distinction between having and not having children in a world suffering significant ecological collapse is not likely to be exempt from this.

Chewy, the protagonist, is boring as a single, regular, dusty, red brick. Maybe there's a small crack in the brick, but it's not large enough to explore. I mean, he has nothing more to say about the world after everything went to shit than that he hates the previous generation (like so many generations before him), and that he looks forward till military service is over? He has a lucid moment where he reflects on treason towards the end, but that's about it for any individuality and thought.

I'm not going to say it was a waste of time to listen to The Wall, but I also do not feel like I leave it having become better in some way, or that I have been shown interesting art or philosophy. Not everything needs to be that, though, and the narration is great at capturing the mood, serving the story up in as good a dressing as can be. For my part, I am glad to put it down, and look forward to more interesting fare ahead.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

esto le resultó útil a 4 personas

Hall of fame for a reason

Revisado: 11-14-19

The middle parts of the first chapter have not aged all that well: incessant harping about mentally handicapped humans/beings have fallen out of favour for good reason. Also, this book suffers the same problem a lot of stories does; sex in writing tends to feel the wrong kind of wooden.

Aside from these notes, it is great! I'm especially fond of the poet's tale, with its mix of philosophy and humour, a bit like a serious version of something Douglas Adams could have written.

Using the noir detective style for the chapter that handles some of the most significant exposition toward the end is a very clever trick. It gives the necessary distance to handle the broad strokes, it allows the action to flow naturally so a reader stays interested, and it leaves enough room for more tender moments so we can care about the characters.

Really, using all these different characters, loosely knowing of each other, from such different backgrounds, to tell the story, is brilliant. The individual parts are long enough that we get to sink our teeth in, so it does not feel like excessive jumping around.

The story is well worth the listen, and belongs among the greats of science fiction for good reason.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Stellar performance of standard story

Revisado: 10-24-19

This is a pretty standard vampire story built around the erotic aspects of vampirism, and the story delivers some passages where the sexual aspect of Carmilla's attachment to Laura blossoms noticeably, though never explosively.

What makes the play worth picking up and listening to is the absolutely stellar performance; Leslie and Tennant in particular give the story life beyond the drab lines themselves.

As one of the monthly picks, I am very happy with this play. I would even recommend it for purchase, if the price matches its length, and so long as the listener is aware of the story being only so-so.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Brilliant about one of the most human of traits

Revisado: 10-23-19

Languages are not made for efficiency, they are made to just work, ish. With all manner of warts and blemishes. And they all borrow, steal, give, and throw away stuff from each other, in a way that is very organic, despite happening on time scales far longer than human lifetimes.

McWhorter comes off a little culturally insensitive sometimes, perhaps, with a humour that relies a bit more on western stereotypes about peoples (themselves included), but to my Scandinavian ears it's never so bad as to really take away from the insights and flow of the story (though, to be fair, he's way out of line suggesting that Norwegian, Swedish, and Danish are all the same language). Also, he pretty much gives all people the same treatment in terms of jokes and stereotypes. And some of his jokes are proper funny.

There's a ton of information covered in these 18 hours of lectures. And not 10% of it will remain lodged in my brain, but I think a few very interesting tidbits will remain from this first listen:
- Languages are not an attempt at conveying information as efficiently as possible. Far from it. Language is just what people do because we are people, and we need to share thoughts and feelings and moods in some way. Language lets us. Even if cumbersomely.
- All languages are complex. There are languages that are easier than others, but all proper languages (of which there are an estimated 6000) have their quirks and issues, making them hard to learn past your early teenage years.
- Nobody uses "nous" in French but for emphasis.
- Nobody uses the "ne" in "ne *verb* pas" in French.
- The more remote a language is, in terms of being spoken by few, the more complex it tends to be. Aside from my cultural pride telling me that Norwegian and English has to be the most advanced languages ever devised, it makes sense that the really big languages are "easy", since all us morons need to manage them.
- English spelling is so messed up in part because spelling was sort of frozen in a time before the "great vowel shift" where things like "food" were pronounced with a long "o", not with a more "u"-like sound.
- A language with a strong tradition for writing changes much more slowly than what is considered natural, because writing locks us into a certain way of thinking about what is right and wrong.
- When young people speak in stupid ways, it's not stupid, it's just that language changes, despite our best efforts.
- Language preservation efforts, though laudable, will always be a sort of losing battle. An interesting point McWhorter raises is that a language that is only spoken, not written, when the speaker is familiar with other languages that ARE written, can sometimes feel unreal. A person who knows English really well, and has a bit of a Native American language, but only in speech, can tend to feel like the second language is not "real", and therefore it can be hard to really motivate preservation efforts.
- Written Arabic is to spoken Arabic(s) what Latin is to Italian, French, Spanish, etc. (at least approximately).
- Creoles, the kind of language that arises when people really need a language right quick, with the typical example being those arising on slave plantations, for example, are proper languages, but also more streamlined than older languages. Basically, when you need a language in a hurry, and cobble it together from pieces of several languages people in an area already know, you don't bother bringing with you all the arcane rubbish that is considered "proper" from the old languages.

Yeah, this is great stuff! I'm already looking forward to listening to McWhorter's second lecture series.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Very important topic, but odd way to tell it

Revisado: 10-23-19

So, the story itself is both good and important, and shining a light on the bottomless brutality these women face must be done, somehow, these stories must be told. In that regard, Gomez fulfils a duty, and the part of the audio play that is the story is done well, even if it's short.

What I dislike very much is the meta story. The start where del Castillo has to settle in and texts her mother and all of that, it's just fluff. It stands in the way of the story. And worse, this 4th wall kind of meta breaking happens all the time through the narrative. The point of it, as far as I can tell, is to highlight the especially powerful passages by having the narrator step out and react to what she is reading, but it just becomes a cheap attempt at triggering my emotions that were already welling up, since I am human and can well understand the emotional weight of the story. So the escapades become annoying and detract from the story.

The stories are true, though, as far as I can tell, or at least true enough that there aren't any embellishments for effect, bringing me back to the point that this is an important story.

Spoiler:
The very last thing del Castillo says, especially the way she says it, casts an unpleasant light on the project; "Did you get what you wanted". This is outside the story, within the meta narrative, and so, the scorn with which she says this, to the playwright himself, makes it sound like she considers being made to read the story a sort of abuse in and of itself. Certainly, the power of the story, with the point made within that "once you know, you cannot un-know", can give rise to resentment by the reader towards the writer. But it also makes it seem like the narrator somehow thinks the story should not have been told. I've decided to chalk it up to a mistake on the part of either the narrator or the writer; it seems completely against the purpose of the play that the play itself should criticise itself for being so brutal, when the brutality is what makes it important. On the other hand, in a one-hour audio play it seems a little unlikely that such a glaring mistake would make it through production. So perhaps I am simply not as good at recognising scornful voices as I think I am.

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Good and nuanced story about humanity

Revisado: 10-15-19

I'll start off by saying I will definitely get the sequels to the book, to learn what will happen with Darrow and Mustang and the rest of them.

I tend to shy away from anything that smells of YA, because I often become annoyed at the simplistic emotional life of many characters in such stories. Here, though there are definitely some artificial stubbornness to Darrow's ability to piece together emotional puzzles, it never really feels like a cheap way to drive the plot forwards. Darrow learns, and does not do the same important mistake more than once. And for the most part, emotional conflict arises in natural, sensible ways; Brown generally does not come off as shoehorning in some stupidity to make a shaky story progress.

A strong point is that the moral and ethics of the story falls towards the delightfully grey middle of the spectrum; for the most part, there are no completely evil nor completely good characters, making the story more interesting automatically.

It is, perhaps, a bit hamfisted the way Brown lays the groundwork for how terrible the societal structure is; "obedience is the highest virtue". It feels unnecessary, on par with jabs (also present in countless other books) of the kind "how on earth could anyone want a government based on the rickety ass idea of democracy?!" I mean, sure, that could be an honest thought, but it seems unlikely to me that someone who has lived an entire life in intellectual deserts with no exposure to any other mode of government than the essentially feudal would even think about democracy, let alone judge it for being useless.

For what small flaws I find with the story, it never detracts from the overall experience, though. The flow is good, the characters grow, Darrow is clever, and in a sense, I get a very Kaladin Stormblessed feel from the latter half of the book, with Darrow's meteoric rise.

Great experience, and well worth the time!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña

Hilarious

Revisado: 10-10-19

To me this is a fantasy version of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I mean it not as an accusation in any way, merely that if you like one, you'll probably like the other.

People saying the recording here is so bad you can't listen to it are full of it; yes, it's not great but the performance is stellar, and overall it wasn't nearly as terrible as other reviews would have me believe.

I know some say it could be better to start at some other point in the order of books, and it's true that Pratchett hadn't quite found his voice yet, and the prose is not quite as polished as later works, but there is, as far as I can tell, no real reason to skip this book.

Well worth the time!

Has calificado esta reseña.

Reportaste esta reseña